Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think this is a bit off....But not sure why.

461 replies

Shortstuff08 · 30/07/2018 15:33

So, I had to go get the morning after pill today. I went to a high street retailer that has a pharmacy. They had a sign saying they provided it.

The woman behind the counter asked me if I was wanting the free one or to pay for it. I said that I assumed I would have to pay. She went away and came back and said they didn't provide the free one. I said that was fine and she told me that the Pharmacist would come our to see me in minute. A man approached me and asked if I was waiting. He then told me that he 'couldn't' provide MAP. I asked if they didn't have any and he said 'no, we do, but I can't give it'

Fair enough, I went to another high street store. Spoke to the Pharmacist there, she asked me a few questions about medication I am on and the gave me it. I said I was relieved she could as the other store couldn't give me it and thought I would spend all day looking for somewhere. She asked me where I had been and then said that some pharmacists, don't give it out due to religious purposes.

I don't think that's ok. If it's your job, how can you refuse on religious grounds? Or are some Pharmacists not able to administer it? Or am I being an arse in thinking that you should just do your job?

OP posts:
flumpybear · 02/08/2018 12:57

I think it shows some ignorance, or perhaps perverse control - quite unlikely that only hours after intercourse that life would have started, it's just preventing not killing a life per se

BertrandRussell · 02/08/2018 12:58

I’m not suggesting that the till operator dresses immodestly or the pharmacist takes the MAP.

BertrandRussell · 02/08/2018 12:59

“The obvious yardstick here is whether you are controlling what someone else chooses to do.”

No. I am expecting somebody to do their job.

JacquesHammer · 02/08/2018 13:00

Being compelled to personally commit one is another

But no-one is suggesting that. They’re suggesting it’s only reasonable to fulfil their role to its absolute.

I would 100% support someone not to want to use the MAP themselves due to their religious beliefs.

ImAIdoot · 02/08/2018 13:00

Yes, but it stands - we are not talking about condoning someone else doing what they choose, we are talking about participating in it, and whether you can be compelled to.

Assuming for the sake of argument that you are not already duty-bound in your profession and it is actually your choice, it is not unreasonable to control what you, personally, will do.

ImAIdoot · 02/08/2018 13:01

No. I am expecting somebody to do their job.

So if their job leaves this choice to them, you don't think they should be compelled to, or you do?

Original poster
Shortstuff08 · 02/08/2018 13:02

Has he? When?

The pope told church elders to stop focusing on issues such as contraception and abortion.

Because at the core of ethics is weighing up which is the greater evil, obviously.

So which is the greater evil

Pharmacist does job correctly, in line with their regulator and gives woman MAP. Using only professional opinion.

Pharmacist, uses their personal opinion to make a decision about treatment, refuses MAP to a woman. Pharmacist, looking from a position of privilege, does not contemplate that 'going elsewhere' is not a option for all women (as many on this thread don't understand). Woman, can't go elsewhere and ends up pregnant. Whole mess of crap occurs due to this.

Which is the greater evil to you?

OP posts:
ImAIdoot · 02/08/2018 13:03

and if you do, do you think it is just the case that their job should be defined this way, or that they literally do not have the right to choose to say no?

cherrryontop · 02/08/2018 13:03

Don't be a pharmacist if you're not prepared too put you own views aside to carry out all aspects of your job. IMO it's as simple as that.

I think it's ridiculous that we have the choice to take the MAP, and that is a very important choice to have as a woman, and some jumped up person at the chemist can refuse to sell it because of THEIR views.

Religion/faith/whatever should not come into a job where health care is provided it. It is about the patient and what they need.

ImAIdoot · 02/08/2018 13:03

Last post @Bertrand

Original poster
Shortstuff08 · 02/08/2018 13:07

So if their job leaves this choice to them, you don't think they should be compelled to, or you do?

If they have a professional reason, they should be allowed to refuse. If I had, declared I was on medicine, that wasn't compatible to MAP then refusal is fair enough.

I don't expect a decision to be made by a pharamacist, based on their personal opinion.

OP posts:
JacquesHammer · 02/08/2018 13:10

So if their job leaves this choice to them, you don't think they should be compelled to, or you do?

Yes. They should be compelled to supply legal medication to those who require it.

The only acceptable reason for refusal is concerns as to whether it’s suitable for the patient for medical reasons.

BertrandRussell · 02/08/2018 13:10

“Has he? When?

The pope told church elders to stop focusing on issues such as contraception and abortion. ”

Do you mean in Gaudete et Exsultate? No he didn’t- he told them not to focus only on those issues but to treat other issues just as seriously. He’s a hardliner on reproductive rights despite the fluffy image.

Original poster
Shortstuff08 · 02/08/2018 13:15

Bert

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/2837495

OP posts:
ImAIdoot · 02/08/2018 13:16

I don't expect a decision to be made by a pharamacist, based on their personal opinion.

...but you would presumably refuse to do seriously unethical things in the workplace. I would stand by your right to do this, but the inconvenient truth of principles is they apply to people you disagree with as well as people you do, so I wouldn't see them as different.

I guess the real question here is can the OP complain, is the person literally failing in their duty and so on. It may be that the person is knowingly risking sacking to avoid doing something they consider seriously unethical, it may be they don't have the stock or the requisite forms. If pharmacists are truly obliged to do this I guess you let their professional body/regulator find that out.

Original poster
Shortstuff08 · 02/08/2018 13:18

Oh and I am not saying he has made great strides at all. But that it's moving in the right direction.

More recent link

www.google.com/amp/s/www.firstpost.com/world/let-couples-not-the-church-decide-on-contraception-pope-francis-writes-in-the-joy-of-love-2719410.html/amp

OP posts:
ImAIdoot · 02/08/2018 13:20

Yes. They should be compelled to supply legal medication to those who require it.

You know the words "legal" and "require" can be and have been defined by different states to apply to all sorts of medical treatments. I guarantee you would refuse to provide some of them. There are cases of life and death for sure, but it's a dangerous game to dictate that medical professionals may not exercise freedom of conscience at all.

JacquesHammer · 02/08/2018 13:22

You know the words "legal" and "require" can be and have been defined by different states to apply to all sorts of medical treatments. I guarantee you would refuse to provide some of them. There are cases of life and death for sure, but it's a dangerous game to dictate that medical professionals may not exercise freedom of conscience at all

I’m not saying don’t exercise freedom of conscience. I’m saying religious beliefs based on a work of fiction aren’t an acceptable rule to impose on other people.

Original poster
Shortstuff08 · 02/08/2018 13:23

but you would presumably refuse to do seriously unethical things in the workplace. I would stand by your right to do this, but the inconvenient truth of principles is they apply to people you disagree with as well as people you do, so I wouldn't see them as different.

His personal ethics mean nothing in relation to his job. If something feels uncomfortable to me at work, but is entirely legal and is the companies procedure I would do it. And if I felt it still wasn't right, I would look at trying to change it. For next time.

OP posts:
JacquesHammer · 02/08/2018 13:24

So “in all conscience I felt the patient wasn’t mentally capable of understanding the contraindications of the MAP?”

Absolutely fine.

“I don’t believe in contraception, it goes against my conscience as a Catholic (for arguments sake)”

Totally unacceptable

ImAIdoot · 02/08/2018 13:30

I’m not saying don’t exercise freedom of conscience. I’m saying religious beliefs based on a work of fiction aren’t an acceptable rule to impose on other people.

I don't want to unpack that argument in this thread, but let's not make rude derisory comments about other people's faiths. It actually doesn't matter that much anyway as religion has only been imputed, not mentioned by the person themselves.

The salient point about what you said is "impose rules on other people" on which I can agree, so you only impose the rules on yourself. Conscientious objection is fine if nobody is going to die from it and you are not legitimately obliged to do the thing in question.

JacquesHammer · 02/08/2018 13:34

Conscientious objection is fine if nobody is going to die from it and you are not legitimately obliged to do the thing in question

Funny how their conscience allows them to take a wage without carrying out the role to its fullest course.

I frankly think people who take a role that involves a caring element with the full knowledge they will be judging morality, have in fact no conscience and are simply interested in forcing their views into others.

ImAIdoot · 02/08/2018 13:36

His personal ethics mean nothing in relation to his job. If something feels uncomfortable to me at work, but is entirely legal and is the companies procedure I would do it. And if I felt it still wasn't right, I would look at trying to change it. For next time

So if you saw something as quote "seriously unethical" you'd do it anyway. Fair enough, that's honest.

I don't know much about pharmacists, but this would be quite a direct breach of my profession's code(s) of conduct and conventions in any case - i would be expected to get sacked first. So it may not be the same for everyone.

JacquesHammer · 02/08/2018 13:36

The religious conscience thing is a funny one.

Years ago I was manager of a pub whilst I studied. Obviously my role included staffing/rotas etc.

I had one guy who told me he couldn’t work on a Sunday due to his religion. Absolutely fine. I never put him on a Sunday shift. Until he found out we paid double time on Sunday shifts, then he managed to allow his conscience to work on a Sunday Wink

Swipe left for the next trending thread